Abstract:
Research suggests that states and societies around the world are increasingly confronted by climate-related security risks. These risks are unavoidably transnational in character, and intergovernmental organizations (IGOs) are instrumental in developing policy solutions and enhancing international cooperation. However, previous research highlights that knowledge about the conditions under which IGOs address climate security risks, and when they do so effectively, is incomplete. There is a need for further in-depth analysis of relevant IGOs in the field of climate security.

Abstract:
Since the financial crisis, EU countries' economies have recovered to the point that they are exiting their adjustment programmes. Institutional stability mechanisms have been improved at the European level, with the promotion of the banking union and the establishment of a European Monetary Fund, for instance. However, the authors argue that such crisis contingencies should include markets in their risk-sharing, which would require better coordination with institutions.

Institution:
Italian Institute for International Political Studies (ISPI)

Abstract:
Under the pressure of the new US administration’s aggressive rhetoric, 2017 has revealed that traditional dynamics among great powers are back in the international context of the XXI century. Contrary to the most optimistic predictions and discourses of the early post-Cold War period, the “game of big powers” is regaining centre stage. This is mainly due to three intertwined processes: the growth and renewed assertiveness of potential United States’ global competitors such as Russia and China; the enduring crisis of multilateralism and global co-existence; and even more, the breakdown of the regional order into increasingly autonomous arenas, where regional powers are on the rise.
The ISPI 2018 Report reflects upon this change, only partly offset by positive news coming from the global economy over the past year. The first part of the volume focuses on the global context; the second investigates the role Europe can play in a “world of big powers”; the last part addresses Italian foreign policy.

Abstract:
The European Union is increasingly active on cyber issues internationally, guided by its various foreign policy documents and strategies, including its 2013 Cybersecurity Strategy and the 2015 Council conclusions on cyber-diplomacy. In line with these documents, the EU has deepened its bilateral ties with a number of key countries, resulting in a network of cyber partnerships. This article explores these partnerships in depth. It seeks to explain the different types of purposes that they fulfil, and the various mechanisms that underpin them, based on an ambitious mapping exercise. In essence, it is argued that the EU’s cyber partnerships aim not only for bilateral cooperation, but also for ‘reflexive’ results (whereby the EU aim to develop its cyber and diplomatic agency) and ‘structural’ results (whereby bilateral partnerships aim to strengthen the multilateral fabric and global internet governance). Once assessed against these multiple and intertwined purposes, these cyber partnerships appear more useful than meets the eye.

Abstract:
Since the end of World War II, foreign policy and security issues have haunted the European dreams of complete integration in terms of alignment in a highly challenging field, which is also constantly interrupted by sovereignty concerns of member states. Within today’s changing dynamics, the EU’s current instruments seem to fall short of preventing terrorism or providing a meaningful answer to the problems in the Middle East. The EU’s capacity to act in this field needs to be strengthened. The newest approach presented by the European External Action Service (EEAS) is called PESCO (the Permanent Structured Cooperation) and aims to change this current structure of “inactivity”. This short paper will briefly analyze this new instrument.

Abstract:
Many observers may easily reach the conclusion that the European Union (EU) has been in crisis for the last decade. Against this background, and especially since the outcome of the Brexit referendum, the EU has begun much soul searching to carve out a new path to its future. This Policy Brief addresses the current Future of Europe debate with the Bratislava Roadmap, the Rome Declaration, the Leaders’ Agenda, and other valuable contributions. It raises the question what kind of narrative the European project will need to survive into the future. What kind of Europeans do we wish to be and what sort of Europe do we want to create? Despite growing mistrust of citizens in their own institutions and rising populism, this Policy Brief pleads for enduring support for the values on which the European project is built. These values should remain beacons for the way in which we legitimise, organise and communicate the work of the EU. Even if we cannot always agree on a common destination, Europeans should be able to agree at least on a shared trajectory based on common values. This is a narrative that should inspire Europe again.

Abstract:
In the perspective of the post-2020 Multiannual financial Framework (MFF), this policy brief suggests three reforms that would improve the aim of the MFF as both an expression of EUs political priorities and budgetary planning tool. It looks into the potential overhaul of the MFF timeline, its structure in the context of new instruments such as the EFSI, and the strategic combination of different EU financial tools intended to stimulate and interconnect economies across the EU-27.

Abstract:
According to member states and EU officials, the European Union is now slowly entering a period of ‘post crisis.’ In this fragile period of stability, the European Commission has begun its task of strengthening the EU’s legislative framework on asylum. The focal point of the Commission’s task has been the reform of the Dublin system which, during the ‘asylum crisis,’ had almost collapsed. This policy brief has three aims. Firstly, it examines how the unprecedented movement of over one million persons seeking international protection to the EU in 2015 led to the fragmentation of the Dublin system. Secondly, it examines the main flaws of the Dublin system, namely the disconnect between the unchanged status quo on the Dublin rules and the ever-changing political and economic environment of the EU. Finally, it examines the Commission’s proposal for the recast of the Dublin system, assessing whether the new elements are adequate in resolving the key problems of the system. It is argued that although the reform does address, to a limited extent, the problems of secondary movement and the overburdening of some member state asylum systems, the reform does not sufficiently resolve the key flaws of Dublin in light of potential future migratory challenges

Abstract:
Few challenges facing the European Union—immigration pressures, the need to decrease security dependence on an increasingly erratic United States, and the United Kingdom's exit from the European Union (Brexit)—are compelling EU leaders to consider overhauling the revenue side of the European Union’s existing budget. To deal with these challenges in the future, the European Union will need resources—at a time when Europeans are increasingly skeptical about the effectiveness of budget-making in Brussels. Longstanding US budgetary procedures of trust fund accounting and earmarking government revenue towards specific priorities can provide a template for European policymakers. Shifting the EU budget towards more earmarked resources would reduce distrust among taxpayers by limiting Brussels’ spending discretion while focusing expenditures on specific challenges facing the European project.